Re: ln and -F

[Paul de Weerd <paul@mail.me.maar.nu>]

On Sun, Jul 21, 2002 at 01:17:39PM +0200, Artur Grabowski wrote:
| > > yes, i have just been doing some reading on that, and one should still be able
| > > to use -F for symlinks, correct? so why not enable a logic rule that makes it
| > > where you have to have -s in conjunction with it, or else it will not work?
| > 
| > You don't need it.  -s will link directories without the need of a -F
| > flag.  The -F stands for "I really mean this, yes I do.  I'm nuts, but
| > go ahead anyway."
| 
| Well, if the filesystems allow it, I'm probably going to remove that ability.
| 
| If the filesystem graph has loops in it, things can deadlock in the kernel
| because there is no way to ensure proper lock ordering.

Please forgive my ignorance, but how about '.' and '..' then ?

Probably a clueless question, but isn't '..' a hardlink to the parent
directory ? And '.' a hardlink to the directory entry for your current
directory in the parent directory ?

$ ls -liaR apple/
total 3
259303 drwxr-xr-x  3 weerd  weerd  512 Jul 21 19:57 .
259297 drwxr-xr-x  7 weerd  weerd  512 Jul 21 19:57 ..
261614 drwxr-xr-x  2 weerd  weerd  512 Jul 21 19:57 pie

apple/pie:
total 2
261614 drwxr-xr-x  2 weerd  weerd  512 Jul 21 19:57 .
259303 drwxr-xr-x  3 weerd  weerd  512 Jul 21 19:57 ..

As you can see, apple/pie/. has inode 261614 as does apple/pie and
apple/pie/.. has inode 259303, just like apple/.

Inquisitive minds would like to know ...

Thanks,

Paul 'WEiRD' de Weerd

-- 
>++++++++[<++++++++++>-]<+++++++.>+++[<------>-]<.>+++[<+
+++++++++++>-]<.>++[<------------>-]<+.--------------.[-]
                 http://www.weirdnet.nl/